Also why is she trying to equate sexism to why shootings occur? Isn't it usually just being bullied or some sort of isolation or mental illness? Seems like she's just grasping at straws because she wants to make some grand point that falls way short.

It's a two-way street for parenting. If parenting has anything to do with it. Trying to blame it all on the men is sexist. Just because males commit the violence doesn't mean sexism has anything to do with it. She's nothing more than another person blaming "rock music" or "rap lyrics." A Full of shit, opportunistic, liar.

What are you even fucking talk about here?

Do you think it is more or less problematic to stigmatise mental health with acts of mass violence than to blame it on sexism? I personally feel that writing off mass shootings as down to spontaneous acts of insanity is much less helpful, stigmatises people with mental health problems and is a complete abdication of social responsibility. Furthermore, acts of violence against others and oneself, even in the context of mental health problems, are strongly socially influenced anyway.

How many journalists have been doxed for reasons other than bitching about Gamergate? Show me the big action you guys have planned against Game Informer, the video game review magazine run by a video game store. Discuss a conflict of interest in video game journalism, besides Dorito-Gate, that has really eaten at you.

ECG answer these things for me
Where do you see ideas of toxic masculinity?
Can you see ideas of toxic masculinity in video games?
Recently has Anitas youtube channel been primarily about video games?

"Ideas of toxic masculinity" is not my term, it's Anita Sarkeesian's.

But yes there are plenty of problematic themes regarding gender and masculinity in games, just as there are on TV, in films, in music, in advertising, in fashion, in sport, in factual media.

Sarkeesian's youtube channel has been about these themes in games, as it has been about television, music etc.

Here-in lies the problem: you cannot articulate your own argument yet you expect me to articulate it for you. You said:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Big Vic

I don't think she is blaming sexism. I think what she is saying is that the men and boys play the video games (or watch the action movies) and want to act it out in real life.

Where did you extrapolate this form? She makes NO mention or allusion to games in her tweet regarding mass shootings. She states clearly she believes the roots of violence lie with sexism. What has any of that got to do with your interpretation of what she has said?

Do you understand how logic works? Can you comprehend sentences written in fairly basic English? If you can, you need to explain how you have arrived at the conclusion that Sarkeesian has stated that games cause men to want to act out violence from games in real life.

ANITA TALKS ABOUT VIDEO GAMES IN HER CHANNEL YOU WOULD KNOW THAT IF YOU ACTUALLY WATCHED HER VIDEOS. ANITA TALKS ABOUT VIDEO GAMES IN HER TWITTER, READ HER TWEETS. THE MAJORITY OF THE STUFF THAT COMES OUT OF HER MOUTH IS ABOUT VIDEO GAMES.

ANITA TALKS ABOUT VIDEO GAMES IN HER CHANNEL YOU WOULD KNOW THAT IF YOU ACTUALLY WATCHED HER VIDEOS. ANITA TALKS ABOUT VIDEO GAMES IN HER TWITTER, READ HER TWEETS. THE MAJORITY OF THE STUFF THAT COMES OUT OF HER MOUTH IS ABOUT VIDEO GAMES.

If your point is that men are more violent in school shootings and toxic masculinity exists, well, guess what? Since you're a guy yourself, you should just cut off your dick and be a woman so that you won't be included in that demographic then as a toxic masculine guy? Makes sense to you, you fucking idiot?

How many journalists have been doxed for reasons other than bitching about Gamergate?

I dunno.

Quote:

Show me the big action you guys have planned against Game Informer, the video game review magazine run by a video game store.

Like the obviously bought and paid for IGN, they're relatively benign compared to the judgmental, inflammatory sites we've focused on. While they're totally under the publisher's heels, I think people rather that than being called 'sexist racist misogynerds' for enjoying Bayonetta.

But if it makes you feel any better, paid for reviews are in fact something GG dudes have touched on, including unearthing letters for Shadows of Morder's publisher asking YouTubers to present their game favorably under bane of DMCAs. These things will be approached, I imagine, but priorities priorities.

Quote:

Discuss a conflict of interest in video game journalism, besides Dorito-Gate, that has really eaten at you.

Me personally?

- Game journalist don't seem to know what they're talking about anymore. Many previews and reviews use increasingly vague language and simple observations discussing games.
- On top of this, they circumvent their decreasing focus on gameplay by speaking more about shit besides the point of the game. While this isn't a GG thing per se - I find these 'game critics' problematic only because they're slowly replacing actual game inspection.
- These journalists then get access to preview events (E3, TGS, etc) while YouTubers and smaller sites/blogs who know a thing or two wait to break press releases after the fact.
- Deeper into some preview events; publishers treating journalists like kings and leaning their play experience (ref: 'Vertical Slice', I think it's called).
- A cultural gulf between how IGN and Game Informer explores Western games versus Eastern games.
- Flimsy game analysis when playing games that are similar to other competitors. Back in the day an article would be free to mention Rock Band in a Guitar Hero article and vice versa - but that has slowed to a very noticeable point. Why do you think that is?
- Editors placing just any writer on any game like their personal preferences mean dick. Kotaku's Patricia Hernandez covered Advanced Warfare. Comedy of the year.
- Game journalists not educating themselves on how to talk to Japanese developers. Often the culture distinction leads to unintentional laughs, other times it's awkward, and a few times it's borderline rude.
- Turning back to journalists not knowing a damn thing anymore; many preview videos (>>>IGN<<
- More but I forget right now.

Now I've heard before this false choice of game sites who shill games versus sites who shill their political agendas, but I believe there's degrees. They can both exist, with happy mediums filling the mainstream void. Lots of sites I never visited before stepped up, but they have some ways to go before they can get the kind of access the chief offenders can get.

I would suggest publishers remove the middle man altogether and provide preview builds and demos to the public each time they do for journalists. This would lessen the public worship of game writers' opinions and build a more informed consumer base all at once. Publishers can also go Nintendo's 'Direct' route, which some companies are already doing. These are basically video power points, but the longer, in-depth nature is far better than 2min CGI trailers.

Reason why I'm asking is because from what I've seen, going strictly off of what I've seen, most, if not all, of the people getting doxed have been either female developers or critics of GG.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kalyx triaD

Like the obviously bought and paid for IGN, they're relatively benign compared to the judgmental, inflammatory sites we've focused on. While they're totally under the publisher's heels, I think people rather that than being called 'sexist racist misogynerds' for enjoying Bayonetta.

It can go either way on Bayonetta. On one hand, she's a powerful character. On the other, couldn't she be a powerful character with a less revealing outfit? I'm not saying put her in a burqa, but it's kind of ridiculous looking.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kalyx triaD

But if it makes you feel any better, paid for reviews are in fact something GG dudes have touched on, including unearthing letters for Shadows of Morder's publisher asking YouTubers to present their game favorably under bane of DMCAs. These things will be approached, I imagine, but priorities priorities.

If anything, I'd say that's a bigger issue than who is fucking who or who is saying mean things about who. If that's the case, then I'd argue that GG has its priorities fucked up.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kalyx triaD

- Game journalist don't seem to know what they're talking about anymore. Many previews and reviews use increasingly vague language and simple observations discussing games.

Reasonable point. The thing is, that's not a problem plaguing just video game journalists. Journalists in general go with simplified observations and vague language on issues that actually matter.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kalyx triaD

- On top of this, they circumvent their decreasing focus on gameplay by speaking more about shit besides the point of the game. While this isn't a GG thing per se - I find these 'game critics' problematic only because they're slowly replacing actual game inspection.

If anything, I'd say this is a matter of personal preference. It'd hard to do a review of "Let's Be Cops", for instance, without discussing the context of what was going on at the time the movie hit theaters. That's a mileage may vary kind of thing.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kalyx triaD

- These journalists then get access to preview events (E3, TGS, etc) while YouTubers and smaller sites/blogs who know a thing or two wait to break press releases after the fact.
- Deeper into some preview events; publishers treating journalists like kings and leaning their play experience (ref: 'Vertical Slice', I think it's called).

Fair points here. I certainly have problems with these items. Angry Joe has also gone on about these issues in the past. The thing is, if this was brought up, instead of some of the stupid shit your cause does in fact go after, they would easily get more people on board with them. And again, these two issues aren't just issues with Video Game Journalists. Look at the White House Correspondence Club Dinner (or whatever the hell it's called) for a similar circle jerk between the media and the people they're supposed to be covering.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kalyx triaD

- A cultural gulf between how IGN and Game Informer explores Western games versus Eastern games.

Again, I can understand that. That would actually make for an interesting topic of conversation. It's not something I fully understand, but that would be a compelling story. Much more than someone posting concerns about how a cause is going, followed by the cause proving her right less than an hour later.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kalyx triaD

- Flimsy game analysis when playing games that are similar to other competitors. Back in the day an article would be free to mention Rock Band in a Guitar Hero article and vice versa - but that has slowed to a very noticeable point. Why do you think that is?
- Editors placing just any writer on any game like their personal preferences mean dick. Kotaku's Patricia Hernandez covered Advanced Warfare. Comedy of the year.

Maybe that was accident, maybe that's design. Comedy of the Year, however, would have been me trying to review it. It probably would have been along the lines of "See last year's review. Also, the Military should probably go through other means to find new recruits."

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kalyx triaD

- Game journalists not educating themselves on how to talk to Japanese developers. Often the culture distinction leads to unintentional laughs, other times it's awkward, and a few times it's borderline rude.

This is one that I haven't seen in more mainstream outlets, but I can see that as being an issue. Something else specific that GG could get behind, if it didn't com off as bitching about "SJWs."

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kalyx triaD

- Turning back to journalists not knowing a damn thing anymore; many preview videos (>>>IGN<<
- More but I forget right now.

And again, that would be a valid complaint. Gamepro wasn't much better back in the day, as far as their writing staffs being heavy into fighting games. At least then there was more mainstream fighting games. (hell, it's likely the same cast of clowns.)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kalyx triaD

Now I've heard before this false choice of game sites who shill games versus sites who shill their political agendas, but I believe there's degrees. They can both exist, with happy mediums filling the mainstream void. Lots of sites I never visited before stepped up, but they have some ways to go before they can get the kind of access the chief offenders can get.

I understand your sentiment, but let's be honest. The point of reviews, be it movie, music, or games, is ultimately to shill the product they are reviewing. Sometimes, the political agendas help shape that shilling.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kalyx triaD

I would suggest publishers remove the middle man altogether and provide preview builds and demos to the public each time they do for journalists. This would lessen the public worship of game writers' opinions and build a more informed consumer base all at once. Publishers can also go Nintendo's 'Direct' route, which some companies are already doing. These are basically video power points, but the longer, in-depth nature is far better than 2min CGI trailers.

On one hand, I like the idea. On the other, this could start boxing out smaller developers further as this could very easily become financially unfeasible.

But thank you on answering my questions. At least you are a bit more intellectually honest than many of the folks who attach themselves to your cause.

However, when Ms. Sarkeesan starts throwing out frivolous lawsuit after frivolous lawsuit attacking games, then talk to me about how she's Jack Thompson.

Before I go point by point; I wanna clarify that those issues I posted were my personal beef with games journalism, rather than the goals of GamerGate (which was posted on the second page or so). You wrote a few times that where you agreed on a point that GG should turn their attention to it, and I would of course like that. There are places where GG and my own criticisms cross paths, I'll try to note these points. Just wanted to make sure these points were my own issues with the industry over the years.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vastardikai

Reason why I'm asking is because from what I've seen, going strictly off of what I've seen, most, if not all, of the people getting doxed have been either female developers or critics of GG.

If that's what you seen I can't fault you for that, nor do I expect you to filter through posts on Twitter or have the insight I had over the months. I can however offer to give you examples of people on the GG side being doxxed and harassed if you want. Early in the thread I was very link happy, but the following pages shows they went largely unnoticed or responded to. From this point on I'll simply offer to provide evidence of certain claims either here or in PMs. I'll need to know people have a genuine interest before I go mining links. Offers on the table. But if you're willing to take my word (for what it's worth to you), yes - people on GG side have been getting the same attacks at the same frequency. It's not what makes it on the headlines and our victims certainly don't get the interviews with MSNBC, but it's happened.

Quote:

It can go either way on Bayonetta. On one hand, she's a powerful character. On the other, couldn't she be a powerful character with a less revealing outfit? I'm not saying put her in a burqa, but it's kind of ridiculous looking.

The funny thing about Bayonetta is she's a character who is covered from the neck down 70% of the time. Her visual gimmick with her clothes receding only occurs during the end of combos and her finishing moves against bosses. Even then the camera sways away to her summoned beast tearing apart a boss. Here's the 'revealing outfit' you're talking about, that she's in most of the time. Consider that she's wearing more than Mirror's Edge's Faith.

Now her character and mannerisms are certainly sexual, but in true hack-n-slash fashion it's over the top as to be comical. She 'vogues' ffs. If that's still a point against her we then have to discuss her creator Kamiya, who's an excellent game designer (DMC1, Viewtiful Joe, Wonderful 101, Okami). Perhaps somebody else could have made Bayonetta and have her less hyper sexual, but then we wouldn't have the best hack-n-slash game ever (opinion mine). Or rather, would you want Kamiya to adjust his creative freedom? I'll choose his creative freedom and game design philosophy every time. Package deal, as it is with any entertainment medium.

Quote:

If anything, I'd say that's a bigger issue than who is fucking who or who is saying mean things about who. If that's the case, then I'd argue that GG has its priorities fucked up.

As I said my own issues don't line up 100% with GG. The group as a whole wants journalistic integrity; and yeah that means writers and subjects fucking will be called out. It's GG's priority as a movement, and I agree.

Quote:

Reasonable point. The thing is, that's not a problem plaguing just video game journalists. Journalists in general go with simplified observations and vague language on issues that actually matter.

Sure, but games journalism would naturally concern gamers, no?

I mean, how many other movements could we dismiss because their concerns are particular? "Throat cancer charity? Why not all cancer?" GG's not out to save journalism of every field.

This probably isn't your intention, but having run into this criticism before it's basically 'it's just games'. I mean, I don't get why people are actually making a case that gamers shouldn't care that much about games journalism. Have a go at demanding why sports fans care about sports controversies and politics.

Quote:

If anything, I'd say this is a matter of personal preference. It'd hard to do a review of "Let's Be Cops", for instance, without discussing the context of what was going on at the time the movie hit theaters. That's a mileage may vary kind of thing.

Agreed.

Quote:

Fair points here. I certainly have problems with these items. Angry Joe has also gone on about these issues in the past. The thing is, if this was brought up, instead of some of the stupid shit your cause does in fact go after, they would easily get more people on board with them.

Again, GG's main goals are not specifically my own.

Quote:

And again, these two issues aren't just issues with Video Game Journalists. Look at the White House Correspondence Club Dinner (or whatever the hell it's called) for a similar circle jerk between the media and the people they're supposed to be covering.

Also again, I don't know where this argument is going. A movement of gamers should cover every field of journalism because 'it's just games'?

But let's have fun with that image; GamerGate working to oust all manner of journalistic fuckery. Would the narrative then be a bunch of basement boys with delusions of grandeur throwing rocks at giants? It's an uphill battle as it is in the public eye getting talked down to by Polygon.

Quote:

Again, I can understand that. That would actually make for an interesting topic of conversation. It's not something I fully understand, but that would be a compelling story. Much more than someone posting concerns about how a cause is going, followed by the cause proving her right less than an hour later.

I forgot to reply your post above where you tied GG to doxxing and threatening behavior. GG doesn't condone this and actively vilifies and roots out the third party trolling everyone. We're not 'proving her right'.

Quote:

Comedy of the Year, however, would have been me trying to review it. It probably would have been along the lines of "See last year's review. Also, the Military should probably go through other means to find new recruits."

Funny thing is, this seems like the first time in a while last years review would not be swappable. I am so down for AW.

Quote:

This is one that I haven't seen in more mainstream outlets, but I can see that as being an issue. Something else specific that GG could get behind, if it didn't com off as bitching about "SJWs."

I explain in the first few pages about why the SJW/extreme feminist connections to this are important in the grand scheme of things. I can dip deeper into that if you wish. Interesting shit.

Quote:

I understand your sentiment, but let's be honest. The point of reviews, be it movie, music, or games, is ultimately to shill the product they are reviewing. Sometimes, the political agendas help shape that shilling.

I disagree, but non-aggressively. It's cool.

Quote:

On one hand, I like the idea. On the other, this could start boxing out smaller developers further as this could very easily become financially unfeasible.

Consider that smaller devs that self publish on the big three consoles are already mandated to provide trial/demos of their games. And historically, smaller teams are much more likely to offer demos and beta runs to their supporters and public game events. This is something I believe they're already primed for.

Quote:

But thank you on answering my questions. At least you are a bit more intellectually honest than many of the folks who attach themselves to your cause.

I dare not argue with this. And I thank you for simply not being Rogerer.

Quote:

However, when Ms. Sarkeesan starts throwing out frivolous lawsuit after frivolous lawsuit attacking games, then talk to me about how she's Jack Thompson.

The narrative's the same, she's just smarter about it. She totally Jackie Thompson.

Anita wouldn't be the person I'd ask about the journalism/feminist academia angle as she's not a part of DIGRA (though I believe she is with Silver String Media). Though it was interesting that that was the only time she flustered in an otherwise bright eyed interview. This is also the first time any mainstream setting asked about that, so kudos to... Steven Colbert (yet again showing more clout than mainstream news).